Saturday, 17 December 2016


What does "Federal Union" mean?
 Here is an explanation of it, taken from the "Saturday Evening Post," of February 10. 1940: "What 'Federal Union' proposes is a federation of fifteen democracies — namely, the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Ireland, France, Belgium, Holland and Switzerland — in the form of a supreme world government, with a constitution, a legislature, a judiciary, and a common citizen ship; with the ultimate power to make war and peace, to make treaties, to issue money and to regulate trade. The military strength of this federation would be such that it could be reduced to one half and still stand as 2 to 1 against the rest of the world. Its economic strength would be even more formidable, since, to begin with, it would own half the earth, control two thirds of all trade, and possess a practical monopoly of all materials. What could survive against it? Other nations would be permitted to join only provided the people in them overthrew their dictators and embraced democracy."
 Such is the outline of the scheme as given by the "Saturday Evening Post" which goes on to say that "Federal Union doesn't make sense," and, after referring to the highly organised campaign behind the scheme, adds: "A little wonder is permitted."
 In a modified form, "Federal Union" appears as a Federation of the States of Europe.

Its Origins.
Who started the idea?
 The idea is not new. The scheme of a World State was embodied in the oath of the notorious secret society, the 'Illuminati' of Bavaria, which was founded in 1776 by Adam Weishaupt. In a book entitled 'La Republique Universelle,' written in 1793 by Clootz, nearly all the ideas now regarded as 'progressive' by modern internationalists are formulated. After the permeation of French freemasonry by the 'Illuminati,' the idea of a universal republic became the slogan of the lodges, and the abolition of all frontiers, nationalities and differences of language and religion constituted the doctrine of the French Grand Orient.
 The communist scheme of a World Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, to be established by world revolution, is based on a similar plan of the same inspiration.
 It would seem, then, that Federal Union, the World Soviet Union, and the World Masonic Republic are merely distinctions of name, without much distinction of substance.

Who's Who?
Who is sponsoring the movement to-day?
 The scheme of Federal Union is supported by the usual clique of extreme, left-wing politicians, pseudo-scientists, men who are well known for their bitter anti-Christian bias, and by a few "pink" clergymen. Prominent amongst its supporters are Professors Bentwick, Joad, Haldane and Laski, and others who took part in the anti-God Congress held in London in September, 1938. We also find the names of H. G. Wells of "Home Sapiens" absurdity, Clarence Streit, an American journalist, and W. B. Curry, who is headmaster of the notorious co-educational school of Dartington Hall, Devon.
 Perhaps even more significant than this is the support given to the movement by the P.E.P. (Political and Economic Planning) Group, whose chairman is Mr. Israel Moses Sieff. This group is completely materialistic in character and outlook and stands —inter alia—for the complete elimination of the smaller trader (My. Israel Moses Sieff is at the head of a vast chain store organisation), and has been defined as "Bolshevism by stealth."
 It is supported also by the Engineers' Study Group, an offshoot of the P.E.P., and by the Royal Institute of international Affairs, better known as the Chatham House Group, which is a government-subsidised organisation, some of whose members have distinguished themselves for their left-wing bias.

 Not An Asset.
 A friends showed me a book on the subject.
 The title was: "The Case for Federal Union." The author of that book is the notorious W. B. Curry already mentioned. He is the headmaster of the ill famed co-educational school called Dartington Hall. In this school which caters for children of both sexes from two to eighteen years of age, nudity is the rule—insofar as there are any rules. He is also President of the high-sounding "Federation of Progressive Societies and Individuals." According to a pamphlet issued by the 'Liberty Restoration League":  "The objects of this organisation . . . include the usual communist aims in industrial matters and the establishment of a World State. It devotes a great deal of its attention, however, to its social aims. These include legislation to secure reform of the Divorce Laws; legalisation of abortion with proper safe guards; abolition of the laws penalising abnormality; provision of facilities for voluntary sterilisation; adequate provision of information on and facilities for birth control; abolition of literary, dramatic and film censorship; disestablishment and disendowment of all State Churches, and the abolition of the blasphemy laws."
 Finally, Mr. Curry and five other prominent supporters of the Federation of Progressive Societies and Individuals were members of the "Committee of Honour" of the anti-God Congress (Congress of the World Union of Freethinkers).
That Federal Union finds an ardent supporter in men like W. B. Curry is sufficient indication that it should be regarded with the greatest suspicion by decent men.
 Extreme left-wing politicians, Mr. Israel Moses Sieff's 'P.E.P.,' the Chatham House Group, the Federation of Progressive Societies and Individuals, the World Union of Freethinkers or the anti-God League, the Dartington Hall Co-educational School, continental freemasonry — such memberships, affiliations and contacts will enable thinking people to form a fairly accurate idea of the forces behind the present campaign for Federal Union.

Good or Bad?
   Is "Federal Union" a good thing, or is it just another racket ?
 In itself the idea of Federal Union is quite good and is, in fact, an eminently Christian concept, just as the ideal of the League of Nations was an eminently Christian concept. But in the hands of atheists, materialists, body-worshippers and other enemies of Christianity, it will simply become an instrument of tyranny and oppression as cruel and as irresponsible as any godless dictatorship.
 There are too many who forget that Leagues and Federations and forms of government do not guarantee our human decencies and liberties, but moral principles which have their meaning and their guarantee in religion and in religion alone. The acceptance of any scheme of Federal Union divorced from Christianity and Christian moral standards would be an appalling catastrophe for the free peoples of the world. And in the hands of its present sponsors. Federal Union has all the appearances of something anti-Christian and unclean.

Is it Fascism?
  The friend who opposed it in the argument said that It was just Fascism under another name.
 A world super-government, with supreme military and economic power at its disposal, and free from the sane restraints imposed by Christian moral standards, could easily become an irresponsible dictatorship of the Hitler or Stalin type on a world-wide instead of merely a national scale.
 Moreover, the national, political, economic and social differences of the various peoples cannot be eliminated simply by uniting them into a sort of political and economic federation. The way to unite peoples is not to abolish, natural differences, but to unite them in the love of something higher. This higher something is not likely to be the super-government of the federation which, without Christianity, would simply become a hotbed of intrigue and an instrument of oppression.
 It is only love of Christ and of Christian ideals which can effectively unite peoples, and lead them to subordinate selfish interests to the common welfare of the human race.

 I would be glad to have your views on the subject.
 They should be sufficiently clear from what has been already said, and I think they are the views of every Christian acquainted with the facts.
 Federal Union is an excellent, idea in itself but divorced from Christianity it has not only no chance of success, but would, in logic and reality, lead to world slavery. In the hands of those at present so prominently associated with it, the scheme may well provide adequate training and preparation for the establishment of a world Bedlam, but not for the establishment of a thoroughly Christian democracy for which we are fighting. People like Messrs. Curry and Sieff should have no part in the planning of the new social order to come after the war which, we are told, is being fought for "Christian civilisation."
 Would you recommend some literature on the about it because I would like to know more about it.
 You will find the scheme explained in "Union Now" by Clarence Streit, and " The Case for Federal Union" by W. B Curry. You will find a history of the movement and a searching analysis of it in two books by Nesta Webster: "Secret Societies and Subversive Movements" and "The Surrender of an Empire." These may be obtained at the Southern Cross Library, Roma House, 543 George Street, Sydney.

Catholic Freeman's Journal (Sydney, NSW : 1932 - 1942), Thursday 1 August 1940, page 9

No comments: